But why such a reversal? Maybe because of the cross-party blame the PM had to face, especially from the Labour party, which reproached him with not being committed enough to helping the Syrians. Yvette Cooper, the Shadow Home Secretary, declared “I think it is a good thing that the government has completely reversed its position – just seven days ago they were refusing to do anything at all to help with providing sanctuary in this way. But it is slightly surprising that they are still refusing to sign up to the UN programme and to do this alongside other countries.” She invited the British government to line up with other Western states. Indeed, while the UK is the second biggest donor of humanitarian aid to Syria, it has not yet joined the initiative led by the UNHCR (the UN refugee agency) which calls European countries to accept 30,000 Syrian refugees currently living in camps in the region.

What is surprising is the reaction of the UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage. Indeed, whereas he has led the opposition against allowing open immigration from the East (with the recent entry of Romania and Bulgaria in the Schengen area). In this case he was among the first to say that the UK has to provide a safe haven to Syrian refugees. To justify this paradox, Farage argues that refugees come to save their lives and not to move for economic benefits as migrants. But while he didn’t give a figure, the Labour Party wants to accept 400 to 500 refugees in the estimated nine million Syrians.

But the main issue will be to understand who the government calls “vulnerable people”. Is it a particular religious group, Christians, for example? Or does it consider all the Syrians who fear for their life? On this point, Hague answered: “This is still being worked on” because as he said, a serious danger of radicalization exists among people returning to the UK from Syria.